- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@akamai.com>
- Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 08:09:40 -0800
- To: Martin Gudgin <marting@develop.com>
- Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
Sorry, I think I missed the definition of 'path' (which seems pretty key here). Is there a reference? On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 12:47:51PM -0000, Martin Gudgin wrote: > Having spent some time thinking about this Stuart and I have come to the > following conclusion; > > If the XML Protocol Layer directly supports the notion of a path then we can > support processing intermediaries that sit between the sender and the > ultimate recipient. We can also support the targeting of XML Protocol > Modules at particular XML Protocol Handlers located at those processing > intermediaries. > > Conversely if the XML Protocol Layer does NOT support the notion of a path > then it becomes inherently single-hop. In this latter case path becomes an > application level construct and not part of the core definition of the XML > Protocol. This would simplify the core definition of XML Protocol while > still allowing applications to layer intermediary processing on top of XML > Protocol. > > Thoughts, comments, flames etc. to the usual address > > Gudge and Stuart > > -- Mark Nottingham, Research Scientist Akamai Technologies (San Mateo, CA)
Received on Friday, 9 February 2001 11:09:42 UTC